Cap1 & CCA return

[PriorityOne]

How can they attempt to enforce a made-up, hypothetical Agreement that has no signature on it ? That means that anyone can go and make one up and go after whoever they want, in theory.

 

Just need to add that one of mine threatened me with this recently and backed out.... dropped all legal action (in writing) and then sold it on to a bunch of bottom-feeders.

 

There was still around £3K outstanding....

[paulwlton]

HI paul wher did you find this

 

I loked into this a little while ago and was not able to find very much information at all.

I discverred the relevant regulations (si1552) i think, but they just list exemptions to the section which are basically just when an agreement is used to by tools or land.But very little else.

 

Best regards

Peter

 

Hi Peter

 

It's just in my view a valid argument in respect of sec59

[Peterbard]

Hi Paul yes uit seems to make sence did you see the leter i got back from the OFT regarding section 59 it is on the letters thread.

 

Best regards

Peter

[Peterbard]

How can they attempt to enforce a made-up, hypothetical Agreement that has no signature on it ? That means that anyone can go and make one up and go after whoever they want, in theory.

 

Just need to add that one of mine threatened me with this recently and backed out.... dropped all legal action (in writing) and then sold it on to a bunch of bottom-feeders.

 

There was still around £3K outstanding....

 

Hi

My view exactly

 

Regards

Peter

[PriorityOne]

It might also be useful to know that I'd been making token payments on this account for 4 years prior to them chucking all their toys from the pram and threatening a CCJ/property charge.... so the fact that they dropped all legal action indicates that they knew they were onto a loser. I made it very clear all legal action would be defended on the grounds of no original CCA...

 

However, the same lender tried to take another CAG member to court recently with a reconstructed Agreement.... but the hearing didn't get very far because it was thrown out as "an abuse of process" on different grounds.

 

Therefore, I assume that if lenders think they can get away with it, i.e, by not get any hassle from the borrower... then they will try... but otherwise, the genuine article would be needed.

[paulwlton]

Email Received today

Dear Mr Walton

Further to our discussion, the question you asked is whether a debtor could continue to make requests under Section 77 post judgment. The Act is silent on this particular matter and as such we presume that this is the case until the debt is discharged. As we have discussed previously, this is not a definitive statement of the law and a court may or may not take this position. Equally, this is a general comment and, as with our previous communications, should not be taken as advice on your particular circumstances.

I understand that you have sought assistance from your Local Authority Trading Standards Service (LATSS) and that the view expressed by it was broadly the same. As the OFT cannot comment or intervene in individual matters and so unfortunately I am unable to assist you further, you may wish to continue to seek asistance from your LATSS.

Yours sincerely

Henry Aitchison

Consumer Credit Enforcement

[andrew1]

Makes you wonder what the OFT are for at all? :?

 

... also, as for re constructed agreements, as one person suggested, why not make one up and do it in the name of the Judge, make him/her realise how simple it is. Not sure they'd be too happy about it, but certainly proves a point.

[shane5408]

Makes you wonder what the OFT are for at all? :?

 

... also, as for re constructed agreements, as one person suggested, why not make one up and do it in the name of the Judge, make him/her realise how simple it is. Not sure they'd be too happy about it, but certainly proves a point.

 

 

This worked a treat! Creditors submitted statements as proof of debt, judge disregarded them completely after we showed him mocked up statements with his name on it and the courts address!

[Having_A_Knightmare]

Hi

 

Just wondering why they are called skeleton Arguments.

 

Can they be used in court?

 

Im getting confused again ....sorry:confused:

[tomterm8]

Hi

 

Just wondering why they are called skeleton Arguments.

 

Can they be used in court?

 

Im getting confused again ....sorry:confused:

 

Skeleton arguments are generally used in the higher courts, not so much used in county courts - although, it is still an entirely legitimate device even in a county court action.

 

The formal definition is " as their name implies, a very abbreviated note of the argument and in no way usurp any part of the function of oral argument in court. They are an aide-memoire for convenience of reference before and during the hearing. "

 

"Litigants in person are strongly encouraged to provide skeleton arguments."

[tomterm8]

paulwlton, I got your PM, but I can't respond... due to the fact that your pm box is full:)

[Having_A_Knightmare]

Tom

 

If a creditor will not give in and keep going on and on.....

 

Could you say take me to court and produce the creditor before he thinks about going to court with the skeleton Argument

 

HAK

[tomterm8]

Tomtom

 

If a creditor will not give in and keep going on and on.....

 

Could you say take me to court and produce the creditor before he thinks about going to court with the skeleton Argument

 

HAK

 

it's not normally a good idea to provide your opponent with your legal argument, BEFORE the court case.

 

Ultimalty, if the creditor gets too uppity, and you know the credit agreement is unlawful, it is open to you to take them to court.

[Having_A_Knightmare]

it is open to you to take them to court.

 

How would you take them to court.

[tomterm8]

 

How would you take them to court.

 

make an application under

 

s 142.

Power to declare rights of parties.

— (1) Where under any provision of this Act a thing can be done by a creditor or owner on an enforcement order only, and either—

(a)

the court dismisses (except on technical grounds only) an application for an enforcement order, or

 

(b)

where no such application has been made or such an application has been dismissed on technical grounds only, an interested party applies to the court for a declaration under this subsection,

 

 

the court may if it thinks just make a declaration that the creditor or owner is not entitled to do that thing, and thereafter no application for an enforcement order in respect of it shall be entertained.

 

(2) Where—

(a)

a regulated agreement or linked transaction is cancelled under section 69(1), or becomes subject to section 69(2), or

 

(b)

a regulated agreement is terminated under section 91,

 

 

and an interested party applies to the court for a declaration under this subsection, the court may make a declaration to that effect.

 

or do an elizabeth1 type of court case (she has a thread example).

[ian1969uk]

Hi Paul yes uit seems to make sence did you see the leter i got back from the OFT regarding section 59 it is on the letters thread.

 

Best regards

Peter

 

Hi Peter

 

Do you have a link to that letterplease?

 

Thanks

[Having_A_Knightmare]

I will try and get my head around this tonight. Thanks for your time.

 

HAK

[conar686]

hI

 

By all means argue with me but lets do it with a degree of mutual respect and humour if possible .

 

Whats an SME??

Hope its a good thing

 

Regards

Peter

 

Debate over arguement, rational over irrational and SME is subject matter expert a compliment methinks

[conar686]

And you to making statements refuting statements without actually countering anything that has been said.

 

You have said a copy agreement will automatically be thrown out by a judge. This is wrong and there are thousands of CCJ's out there to refute that. But hey, I'm not making any useful posts. I would just like to say that you heard it here first - go straight into court and don't worry about the fact that they've only got a copy of your agreement because the judge is on your side, he won't give you a CCJ that superceeds the agreement at all, he'll stop them in their tracks. Don't worry, you'll be able to sit there all innocently and say 'but they have forged it'. The judge will take this and throw the case out.

 

Continue giving such wonderful advice Peter, continue lining people up for financial woes, continue making people not wise up to the reality of what is in store for them and continue to make people feel rosy inside. What is it going to take to make you realise the errors of your ways? Pathetic attempts to insult me are meaningless, but your gung-ho, inability to take criticism and debate, taking things too personally and basically being unable to see the errors of your ways is astounding.

 

Think about the absurdities of your posts. You are stating that a copy is inadmissible, or at best will be hard to get past a judge (both wrong!) by making people quote letters you have received are absurd. Your asking a judge to throw out a copy of a document on one hand (signed by you that may well be enforceable) on the basis of a letter or an email from someone you have never met sent to someone else you have never met but told you on a website somewhere that a copy was inadmissible? Do you think their solicitor is going to let that slide? You're attempting to advocate a hobsons choice, a catch 22, an absurd absolute on a wing and a prayer. The facts of the matter are this: CCJ's are issued on a daily basis across the UK using microfiched copies of an agreement, this is, and will continue to be, accepted by the judges in county court. You must have a reason to believe the copy agreement is not acceptable and it must be convincing. A judge that sees payments made by you, a microfiched copy of an agreement signed by you and an outlandish arguement along the lines that the agreement is in some way falsified will get you a CCJ, end of story.

 

So, are you going to go back and edit your posts this time like you did the last time we argued, so as to put a positive spin on what you had written?

 

As one who actually saw the case you were trying to make 'the above rant' just lost you a supporter. I suppose that will affect you not a lot but hey its got to be said.

 

Stop being so up yerself dude & chill

[paulwlton]

paulwlton, I got your PM, but I can't respond... due to the fact that your pm box is full:)

 

Empty now TT8.

[paulwlton]

Is a creditor allowed to apply interest on a document/admin fee and include this in the tap?

 

Paul

[Peterbard]

Hi Paul

 

I PMd you on this but just for others

 

Usually this fee is a one off patment however there is no reason why they should not charge interst as long as it is itemised and the interst rate is provided.

Of course all this information would have to be included within the total charge for credit and could not form part of the total credit.

This would also have an effect on the APR of the loan.

 

It would have to be included inthe total amount payable s this consts of

Amount of credit

Total charge for credit

 

Regards

Peter

[Peterbard]

Debate over arguement, rational over irrational and SME is subject matter expert a compliment methinks

 

Hi

 

Thanks

 

Got to get back to making people feel rosy inside now

 

Best regards

peter

[paulwlton]

Hi Peter

 

a. Charges payable under the credit agreement

 

The interest on the credit and any other charges payable under the

agreement, such as documentation or administration fees or an option to

purchase fee under a hire-purchase agreement.

 

It reads to me that interest is charged on the credit only, a document fee cannot be classed has credit, so is included in TAP.

[Peterbard]

And you to making statements refuting statements without actually countering anything that has been said.

 

You have said a copy agreement will automatically be thrown out by a judge. This is wrong and there are thousands of CCJ's out there to refute that. But hey, I'm not making any useful posts. I would just like to say that you heard it here first - go straight into court and don't worry about the fact that they've only got a copy of your agreement because the judge is on your side, he won't give you a CCJ that superceeds the agreement at all, he'll stop them in their tracks. Don't worry, you'll be able to sit there all innocently and say 'but they have forged it'. The judge will take this and throw the case out.

 

Continue giving such wonderful advice Peter, continue lining people up for financial woes, continue making people not wise up to the reality of what is in store for them and continue to make people feel rosy inside. What is it going to take to make you realise the errors of your ways? Pathetic attempts to insult me are meaningless, but your gung-ho, inability to take criticism and debate, taking things too personally and basically being unable to see the errors of your ways is astounding.

 

Think about the absurdities of your posts. You are stating that a copy is inadmissible, or at best will be hard to get past a judge (both wrong!) by making people quote letters you have received are absurd. Your asking a judge to throw out a copy of a document on one hand (signed by you that may well be enforceable) on the basis of a letter or an email from someone you have never met sent to someone else you have never met but told you on a website somewhere that a copy was inadmissible? Do you think their solicitor is going to let that slide? You're attempting to advocate a hobsons choice, a catch 22, an absurd absolute on a wing and a prayer. The facts of the matter are this: CCJ's are issued on a daily basis across the UK using microfiched copies of an agreement, this is, and will continue to be, accepted by the judges in county court. You must have a reason to believe the copy agreement is not acceptable and it must be convincing. A judge that sees payments made by you, a microfiched copy of an agreement signed by you and an outlandish arguement along the lines that the agreement is in some way falsified will get you a CCJ, end of story.

 

So, are you going to go back and edit your posts this time like you did the last time we argued, so as to put a positive spin on what you had written?

 

Hi Just looking at the above

 

I wasn't going to respond bassically because i know it was the stated intention of this person to come on this forum and wind me up.

However the thought occured to me that this may have the effect of confusing people about the issue of copy documents and particularily what is the current belief in what and what is not acceptable.

If this does raise any questions in peoples mind i will be happy to try and clarify in my bungling way.

 

Best regards

Peter